Print

Print


It is not a change I really made throughout the library, but all the code
I've written doesn't use the object recycling which is prevalent throughout
ECJ. I don't have any numbers, but it is generaly accepted that object
creation is so cheap, that it is useless to recycle large amounts of small
objects and that it will actually slow the program down. It also introduces
extra unneeded complexity in the design of ECJ and I rather see it go than
stay.
 Just my 2 cents...
Arjan

 On 10/22/05, Colbert Philippe <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> I am pleased to have already received the response of some people who want
> to participate in making modifications to ECJ. I want to point-out that
> my wish is to have a modernized ECJ that can run on personal computers
> (Windows or Linux) and more importantly run on Grid servers (like some IBM
> related grid service).
>
> I am interested to learn about other platforms that people use ECJ in.
>
> One participant (Harri Salakoski) said to have already ported ECJ on Java
> 1.5 which is wonderful. We will surely use his experience when we come to
> that.
>
> Always with the agreement of Sean Luke (the custodian of ECJ), I would
> agree to open the circle of people participating in the ECJ changes.
>
>
> One person suggested using CVG (source code control) to do it. I agree
> entirely. This will secure the updates and will make fixing bugs much
> easier.
>
> I was asked by Harri Salakoski: Why not use the ANT expression
> <include name="**/*.java" />
> instead of listing each sub-directories?
>
> ANSWER: I wanted to reuse Sean Luke's list of directory to show him the
> ease with which ANT files are used. There is another deeper reason.
> When you make a big change to the code, it is sometimes nice to compile
> the project one directory at time. Using a list of directories in ANT,
> you can comment out all but the first directory in the list. Then run a
> compile. If it's OK you go on and uncomment the second line until the
> entire project is compiled. This incremental way of compile is often
> useful.
>
> I am interested to learn about other people who have their own private
> changes to ECJ.
>
> Colbert Philippe
>